Shemot 6:12 raises at least two questions. One, Greenberg (1969, p. 145) is bothered why Moshe did not refer to his previous failure with Pharaoh? One answer is that it makes more sense for Moshe to refer to his most recent failure that the Jewish people did not listen to him than to his earlier failure with Pharaoh. Secondly, the failure of the first mission was irrelevant at this point since in the first mission Moshe was an unenthusiastic leader of the people, while now Moshe had become a willing leader of the people.
A second difficulty of 6:12 is that Moshe mentions that he had some speech impediment, but this had already been dealt with in chapter 4. 4:10 records that Moshe told G-d that he was “heavy of speech” and G-d had responded that Aharon would speak for him, 4:14-16. This same result, that Aharon would help Moshe, occurs after Moshe’s complaint of his speech impediment in 6:12 and 6:30, 7:1. Even if Moshe had not been an unenthusiastic leader in the beginning, why did Moshe mention his speech problem a second time if the problem had already been resolved? Also, why would Aharon have to be appointed again if he was already appointed before?
There are four possible answers to why Moshe refers to his speech impediment a second time.
One, it is possible that Moshe was referring to different problems, as in 4:10 Moshe refers to his heaviness of speech, while in 6:12 he refers to his foreskinned lips. Maybe Moshe had two problems with his speech, which could be either that he was not loquacious (Luzzatto on 4:10), or he was not fluent in Egyptian (Rashbam on 4:10) or he had some physical defect (Rashi on 6:12). Yet, this approach does not explain why Moshe was worried about a second speech problem once he already knew that Aharon would do the speaking.
Two, Bekhor Shor (on 6:29) suggests that really Moshe only asked about his speech once at the burning bush and chapter 6 is a brief review of that conversation. Yet, at the burning bush Moshe had many questions, why was only this question repeated, as for instance the Torah did not repeat that nobody was seeking his life (4:19)?
Three, Or Hachayyim (on 6:28) suggests that initially Aharon was only appointed to speak to the Jewish people, and Moshe was worried about speaking to Pharaoh. Thus, now Aharon was appointed also to speak to Pharaoh. Moshe Greenberg (1969, p. 145) rejects this approach since 5:1 records that Aharon went with Moshe to speak to Pharaoh, and 6:9 records that Moshe spoke to the people without Aharon.
Four, Ralbag (on 6:12, also see Seforno on 6:12) suggests that Moshe thought that initially Aharon had only been appointed to be his speaker for the first mission, and hence Moshe raised the problem of his speech a second time before going on his second mission. Thus, at this time, Moshe learned that Aharon would help him on all his missions.
Why would Moshe have thought that Aharon was only appointed for the first mission? The answer to this question is also based on the development of Moshe from an unenthusiastic leader to a willing leader. When Moshe was an unenthusiastic leader, then his complaint about his speech was not just a technical question, but also was an excuse not to go on the mission. Thus, the appointment of Aharon to help him speak in 4:14-16 was also to give him encouragement to go to Pharaoh. However, after Moshe became a willing leader, Moshe no longer needed Aharon’s encouragement. Thus, Moshe was to go by himself without Aharon even with his speech problem, and this is exactly what occurred in 6:9, that Moshe spoke to the Jewish people directly without Aharon. However, after the people did not listen to Moshe even when he was full of enthusiasm, then Moshe realized that enthusiasm was not enough to overcome his speech problem. Thus, Moshe refers to this speech problem again, and G-d appointed Aharon a second time not to give encouragement to Moshe but to solve the technical issue of Moshe’s speech problem.
Did Moshe always need Aharon to speak for him? Ibn Ezra (on 7:2 and on 4:30) argues that Aharon always came with Moshe even when Aharon is not mentioned in the text. This would seem to assume to assume that Aharon always had to speak for Moshe, as why else did he always come with Moshe? It is true that generally Pharaoh called for both of them but this would not prove that when Moshe went to Pharaoh, Aharon went with him. Amos Chacham (1991, p. 176) brings a proof for the Ibn Ezra. 10:1 records only that Moshe was commanded to go to Pharaoh, but 10:3 records that both Moshe and Aharon went and spoke to Pharaoh. However, it appears to me to be speculation to assume that Aharon was present when the Torah only refers to Moshe.
I believe that 10:1-3 is an exception to the general rule. It has been noted that Aharon only performed the plagues when the advisers to Pharaoh are mentioned. The idea being that Aharon was to Moshe like the advisors of Pharaoh were to Pharaoh. By the plague of 10:1-3, the locusts, we find that in 10:7 the advisors to Pharaoh urged Pharaoh to let the Jewish men go. Thus, once the advisers to Pharaoh appear then Aharon has to appear and he has the same role as they have. The advisors just spoke so too Aharon just spoke. However, when there are no advisors then Aharon would also not be with Moshe. Ibn Ezra seems to have a static understanding of Moshe that Moshe did not develop. However, after chapter 6 we never hear of Moshe complaining of his speech problems. Furthermore, Aharon only figures prominently by the meeting with Pharaoh before the plagues and for the first three plagues. Afterwards, Aharon becomes secondary in the narrative.
My guess is that Moshe developed as a leader that he could speak and argue with Pharaoh without having to rely on Aharon. Thus by the fourth plague, Pharaoh called both Moshe and Aharon to begin negotiating, but Moshe answered Pharaoh directly without hesitating or having Aharon speak, 4:21-26. Aharon was needed initially when Moshe still did not have enough confidence to overcome his speech problems. However, as the plagues continued, Moshe’s confidence grew and he became the Moshe we think of for the remainder of the Torah.
Chacham, Amos, 1991, Da'at Mikra: Commentary on Shemot, Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
Fox, Everett, 1995, The Five Books of Moses: A new translation, New York: Schocken Books.
Greenberg, Moshe (1928-2010), 1969, Understanding Exodus, New York: Behrman House.
No comments:
Post a Comment